Antecedent Administration of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonists and Survival After Hospitalization for COVID-19 Syndrome.

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) utilizes the angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE-2) receptor to enter human cells. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin II receptor antagonists (ARB) are associated with ACE-2 upregulation. We hypothesized that antecedent use of ACEI/ARB may be associated with mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods and Results We used the Coracle registry, which contains data of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in 4 regions of Italy, and restricted analyses to those ≥50 years of age. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Among these 781 patients, 133 (17.0%) used an ARB and 171 (21.9%) used an ACEI. While neither sex nor smoking status differed by user groups, patients on ACEI/ARB were older and more likely to have hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and congestive heart failure. The overall mortality rate was 15.1% (118/781) and increased with age (PTrend<0.0001). The crude odds ratios (ORs) for death for ACEI users and ARB users were 0.98, 95% CI, 0.60-1.60, P=0.9333, and 1.13, 95% CI, 0.67-1.91, P=0.6385, respectively. After adjusting for age, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and congestive heart failure, antecedent ACEI administration was associated with reduced mortality (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.31-0.98, P=0.0436); a similar, but weaker trend was observed for ARB administration (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.32-1.07, P=0.0796). Conclusions In those aged ≥50 years hospitalized with COVID-19, antecedent use of ACEI was independently associated with reduced risk of inpatient death. Our findings suggest a protective role of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibition in patients with high cardiovascular risk affected by COVID-19.

Assessing efficacy of antiviral therapy for COVID-19 patients: A case study on remdesivir with bayesian synthesis design and multistate analysis.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: A synthesis design and multistate analysis is required for assessing the clinical efficacy of antiviral therapy on dynamics of multistate disease progression and in reducing the mortality and enhancing the recovery of patients with COVID-19. A case study on remdesivir was illustrated for the clinical application of such a novel design and analysis. METHODS: A Bayesian synthesis design was applied to integrating the empirical evidence on the one-arm compassion study and the two-arm ACTT-1 trial for COVID-19 patients treated with remdesivir. A multistate model was developed to model the dynamics of hospitalized COVID-19 patients from three transient states of low, medium-, and high-risk until the two outcomes of recovery and death. The outcome measures for clinical efficacy comprised high-risk state, death, and discharge. RESULTS: The efficacy of remdesivir in reducing the risk of death and enhancing the odds of recovery were estimated as 31% (95% CI, 18-44%) and 10% (95% CI, 1-18%), respectively. Remdesivir therapy for patients with low-risk state showed the efficacy in reducing subsequent progression to high-risk state and death by 26% (relative rate (RR), 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55-0.93) and 62% (RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.29-0.48), respectively. Less but still statistically significant efficacy in mortality reduction was noted for the medium- and high-risk patients. Remdesivir treated patients had a significantly shorter period of hospitalization (9.9 days) compared with standard care group (12.9 days). CONCLUSION: The clinical efficacy of remdesvir therapy in reducing mortality and accelerating discharge has been proved by the Bayesian synthesis design and multistate analysis.

Vaccinated and Convalescent Donor-Derived Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2-Specific T Cells as Adoptive Immunotherapy for High-Risk Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients.

BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic poses an urgent need for the development of effective therapies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We first tested SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell (CοV-2-ST) immunity and expansion in unexposed donors, COVID-19-infected individuals (convalescent), asymptomatic polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive subjects, vaccinated individuals, non-intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalized patients, and ICU patients who either recovered and were discharged (ICU recovered) or had a prolonged stay and/or died (ICU critical). CoV-2-STs were generated from all types of donors and underwent phenotypic and functional assessment. RESULTS: We demonstrate causal relationship between the expansion of endogenous CoV-2-STs and the disease outcome; insufficient expansion of circulating CoV-2-STs identified hospitalized patients at high risk for an adverse outcome. CoV-2-STs with a similarly functional and non-alloreactive, albeit highly cytotoxic, profile against SARS-CoV-2 could be expanded from both convalescent and vaccinated donors generating clinical-scale, SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell products with functional activity against both the unmutated virus and its B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 variants. In contrast, critical COVID-19 patient-originating CoV-2-STs failed to expand, recapitulating the in vivo failure of CoV-2-specific T-cell immunity to control the infection. CoV-2-STs generated from asymptomatic PCR-positive individuals presented only weak responses, whereas their counterparts originating from exposed to other seasonal coronaviruses subjects failed to kill the virus, thus disempowering the hypothesis of protective cross-immunity. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we provide evidence on risk stratification of hospitalized COVID-19 patients and the feasibility of generating powerful CoV-2-ST products from both convalescent and vaccinated donors as an "off-the shelf" T-cell immunotherapy for high-risk patients.

SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive and PCR-negative cases of pneumonia admitted to the hospital during the peak of COVID-19 pandemic: analysis of in-hospital and post-hospital mortality.

BACKGROUND: During the spike of COVID-19 pandemic in Kazakhstan (June-2020), multiple SARS-CoV-2 PCR-test negative pneumonia cases with higher mortality were reported by media. We aimed to study the epidemiologic characteristics of hospitalized PCR-test positive and negative patients with analysis of in-hospital and post-hospital mortality. We also compare the respiratory disease characteristics between 2019 and 2020. METHODS: The study population consist of 17,691 (March-July-2020) and 4600 (March-July-2019) hospitalized patients with respiratory diseases (including COVID-19). The incidence rate, case-fatality rate and survival analysis for overall mortality (in-hospital and post-hospital) were assessed. RESULTS: The incidence and mortality rates for respiratory diseases were 4-fold and 11-fold higher in 2020 compared to 2019 (877.5 vs 228.2 and 11.2 vs 1.2 per 100,000 respectively). The PCR-positive cases (compared to PCR-negative) had 2-fold higher risk of overall mortality. We observed 24% higher risk of death in males compared to females and in older patients compared to younger ones. Patients residing in rural areas had 66% higher risk of death compared to city residents and being treated in a provisional hospital was associated with 1.9-fold increased mortality compared to those who were treated in infectious disease hospitals. CONCLUSION: This is the first study from the Central Asia and Eurasia regions, evaluating the mortality of SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive and PCR-negative respiratory system diseases during the peak of COVID-19 pandemic. We describe a higher mortality rate for PCR-test positive cases compared to PCR-test negative cases, for males compared to females, for elder patients compared to younger ones and for patients living in rural areas compared to city residents.

Randomized clinical trial to evaluate a routine full anticoagulation Strategy in Patients with Coronavirus Infection (SARS-CoV2) admitted to hospital: Rationale and design of the ACTION (AntiCoagulaTlon cOroNavirus)-Coalition IV trial.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have suggested a higher risk of thrombotic events in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Moreover, elevated D-dimer levels have been identified as an important prognostic marker in COVID-19 directly associated with disease severity and progression. Prophylactic anticoagulation for hospitalized COVID-19 patients might not be enough to prevent thrombotic events; therefore, therapeutic anticoagulation regimens deserve clinical investigation. DESIGN: ACTION is an academic-led, pragmatic, multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase IV clinical trial that aims to enroll around 600 patients at 40 sites participating in the Coalition COVID-19 Brazil initiative. Eligible patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 with symptoms up to 14 days and elevated D-dimer levels will be randomized to a strategy of full-dose anticoagulation for 30 days with rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (or full-dose heparin if oral administration is not feasible) vs standard of care with any approved venous thromboembolism prophylaxis regimen during hospitalization. A confirmation of COVID-19 was mandatory for study entry, based on specific tests used in clinical practice (RT-PCR, antigen test, IgM test) collected before randomization, regardless of in the outpatient setting or not. Randomization will be stratified by clinical stability at presentation. The primary outcome is a hierarchical analysis of mortality, length of hospital stay, or duration of oxygen therapy at the end of 30 days. Secondary outcomes include the World Health Organization's 8-point ordinal scale at 30 days and the following efficacy outcomes: incidence of venous thromboembolism , acute myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism, major adverse limb events, duration of oxygen therapy, disease progression, and biomarkers. The primary safety outcomes are major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria. SUMMARY: The ACTION trial will evaluate whether in-hospital therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban for stable patients, or enoxaparin for unstable patients, followed by rivaroxaban through 30 days compared with standard prophylactic anticoagulation improves clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer levels.

CD177, a specific marker of neutrophil activation, is associated with coronavirus disease 2019 severity and death.

The identification of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 and high risk of severe disease is a challenge in routine care. We performed cell phenotypic, serum, and RNA sequencing gene expression analyses in severe hospitalized patients (n = 61). Relative to healthy donors, results showed abnormalities of 27 cell populations and an elevation of 42 cytokines, neutrophil chemo-attractants, and inflammatory components in patients. Supervised and unsupervised analyses revealed a high abundance of CD177, a specific neutrophil activation marker, contributing to the clustering of severe patients. Gene abundance correlated with high serum levels of CD177 in severe patients. Higher levels were confirmed in a second cohort and in intensive care unit (ICU) than non-ICU patients (P < 0.001). Longitudinal measurements discriminated between patients with the worst prognosis, leading to death, and those who recovered (P = 0.01). These results highlight neutrophil activation as a hallmark of severe disease and CD177 assessment as a reliable prognostic marker for routine care.

Development and Validation of ARC, a Model for Anticipating Acute Respiratory Failure in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate factors predictive of clinical progression among coronavirus disease 2019 patients following admission, and whether continuous, automated assessments of patient status may contribute to optimal monitoring and management. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort for algorithm training, testing, and validation. SETTING: Eight hospitals across two geographically distinct regions. PATIENTS: Two-thousand fifteen hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019-positive patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Anticipating Respiratory failure in Coronavirus disease (ARC), a clinically interpretable, continuously monitoring prognostic model of acute respiratory failure in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients, was developed and validated. An analysis of the most important clinical predictors aligns with key risk factors identified by other investigators but contributes new insights regarding the time at which key factors first begin to exhibit aberrency and distinguishes features predictive of acute respiratory failure in coronavirus disease 2019 versus pneumonia caused by other types of infection. Departing from prior work, ARC was designed to update continuously over time as new observations (vitals and laboratory test results) are recorded in the electronic health record. Validation against data from two geographically distinct health systems showed that the proposed model achieved 75% specificity and 77% sensitivity and predicted acute respiratory failure at a median time of 32 hours prior to onset. Over 80% of true-positive alerts occurred in non-ICU settings. CONCLUSIONS: Patients admitted to non-ICU environments with coronavirus disease 2019 are at ongoing risk of clinical progression to severe disease, yet it is challenging to anticipate which patients will develop acute respiratory failure. A continuously monitoring prognostic model has potential to facilitate anticipatory rather than reactive approaches to escalation of care (e.g., earlier initiation of treatments for severe disease or structured monitoring and therapeutic interventions for high-risk patients).

Obstructive sleep apnea and COVID-19 clinical outcomes during hospitalization: a cohort study.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is an extremely common sleep disorder. A potential association between OSA and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity has been proposed on the basis of similar comorbid medical conditions associated with both OSA and COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 1,738 patients who were hospitalized with COVID-19 between March and October of 2020. Patients were classified based on the presence or absence of OSA diagnosis based upon the International Classification of Diseases (ICD; codes G47.33 and U07.1 for OSA and COVID-19, respectively). Other data were collected, including demographics, body mass index, and comorbid conditions. COVID-19 severity was compared between groups using the quick COVID-19 severity index. RESULTS: Quick COVID-19 severity index scores were higher in patients with OSA compared with those without OSA. However, the prevalence rates of type 2 diabetes (P < .0001), coronary artery disease (P < .0001), congestive heart failure (P < .0001), and chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (P < .0001) were also significantly greater in the OSA group. Unadjusted models revealed higher risk of intensive care unit admission in patients with COVID-19 and OSA. However, such an association was attenuated and became nonsignificant after adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, and comorbid disease. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, OSA does not appear to be an independent risk factor for worse COVID-19 outcomes in hospitalized patients. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to delineate the potential role of OSA in determining outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. CITATION: Mashaqi S, Lee-Iannotti J, Rangan P, et al. Obstructive sleep apnea and COVID-19 clinical outcomes during hospitalization: a cohort study. J Clin Sleep Med. 2021;17(11):2197-2204.

Chronic Oral Anticoagulation and Clinical Outcome in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients.

PURPOSE: The clinical course of COVID-19 may be complicated by acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and thromboembolic events, which are associated with high risk of mortality. Although previous studies reported a lower rate of death in patients treated with heparin, the potential benefit of chronic oral anticoagulation therapy (OAT) remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the association between OAT with the risk of ARDS and mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This is a multicenter retrospective Italian study including consecutive patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from March 1 to April 22, 2020, at six Italian hospitals. Patients were divided into two groups according to the chronic assumption of oral anticoagulants. RESULTS: Overall, 427 patients were included; 87 patients (19%) were in the OAT group. Of them, 54 patients (13%) were on treatment with non-vitamin k oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and 33 (8%) with vitamin-K antagonists (VKAs). OAT patients were older and had a higher rate of hypertension, diabetes, and coronary artery disease compared to No-OAT group. The rate of ARDS at admission (26% vs 28%, P=0.834), or developed during the hospitalization (9% vs 10%, P=0.915), was similar between study groups; in-hospital mortality (22% vs 26%, P=0.395) was also comparable. After balancing for potential confounders by using the propensity score matching technique, no differences were found in term of clinical outcome between OAT and No-OAT patients CONCLUSION: Oral anticoagulation therapy, either NOACs or VKAs, did not influence the risk of ARDS or death in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Assessment of the Association of COPD and Asthma with In-Hospital Mortality in Patients with COVID-19. A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression Analysis.

Together, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma account for the most common non-infectious respiratory pathologies. Conflicting preliminary studies have shown varied effect for COPD and asthma as prognostic factors for mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of this study was to explore the association of COPD and asthma with in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19 by systematically reviewing and synthesizing with a meta-analysis the available observational studies. MEDLINE, Scopus, and medRxiv databases were reviewed. A random-effects model meta-analysis was used, and I-square was utilized to assess for heterogeneity. In-hospital mortality was defined as the primary endpoint. Sensitivity and meta-regression analyses were performed. Thirty studies with 21,309 patients were included in this meta-analysis (1465 with COPD and 633 with asthma). Hospitalized COVID-19 patients with COPD had higher risk of death compared to those without COPD (OR: 2.29; 95% CI: 1.79-2.93; I2 59.6%). No significant difference in in-hospital mortality was seen in patients with and without asthma (OR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.68-1.10; I2 0.0%). The likelihood of death was significantly higher in patients with COPD that were hospitalized with COVID-19 compared to patients without COPD. Further studies are needed to assess whether this association is independent or not. No significant difference was demonstrated in COVID-19-related mortality between patients with and without asthma.

Adjunctive homeopathic treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients (COVIHOM): A retrospective case series.

BACKGROUND: and purpose. COVID-19 is a novel viral disease causing worldwide pandemia. The aim of this study was to describe the effect of adjunctive individualized homeopathic treatment delivered to hospitalized patients with confirmed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. PATIENT PRESENTATION: Thirteen patients with COVID-19 were admitted. Mean age was 73.4 ± 15.0 (SD) years. Twelve (92.3%) were speedily discharged without relevant sequelae after 14.4 ± 8.9 days. A single patient admitted in an advanced stage of septic disease died in hospital. A time-dependent improvement of relevant clinical symptoms was observed in the 12 surviving patients. Six (46.2%) were critically ill and treated in the intensive care unit (ICU). Mean stay at the ICU of the 5 surviving patients was 18.8 ± 6.8 days. In six patients (46.2%) gastrointestinal disorders accompanied COVID-19. CONCLUSION: The observations suggest that adjunctive homeopathic treatment may be helpful to treat patients with confirmed COVID-19 even in high - risk patients especially since there is no conventional treatment of COVID-19 available at present.

Risk Factors for Mortality in COVID-19 Hospitalized Patients in Piedmont, Italy: Results from the Multicenter, Regional, CORACLE Registry.

BACKGROUND: CORACLE is a retrospective and prospective, regional multicenter registry, developed to evaluate risk factors for mortality in a cohort of patients admitted with SARS-CoV-2 infection within non-intensive wards. METHODS: The primary objective was to estimate the role of several prognostic factors on hospital mortality in terms of adjusted Odds Ratios (aOR) with multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 1538 patients were enrolled; 42% were female, and 58% were >70 years old. Deceased patients were 422 (27%), with a median age of 83 years (IQR (Inter Quartile Range) 76-87). Older age at admission (aOR 1.07 per year, 95%CI 1.06-1.09), diabetes (1.41, 1.02-1.94), cardiovascular disease (1.79, 1.31-2.44), immunosuppression (1.65, 1.04-2.62), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 (3.53, 2.26-5.51), higher C-reactive protein values and a decreased PaO2/FiO2 ratio at admission were associated with a higher risk of hospital mortality. Amongst patients still alive on day 7, only hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) treatment was associated with reduced mortality (0.57, 0.36-0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Several risk factors were associated with mortality in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients. Although HCQ seems to be the only factor significantly associated with reduced mortality, this result is in contrast with evidence from randomized studies. These results should be interpreted in light of the study limitations.

The Impact of Increased Fib-4 Score in Patients with Type II Diabetes Mellitus on Covid-19 Disease Prognosis.

Background: Emerging evidence suggests that patients with metabolic (dysfunction) associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) are prone to severe forms of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), especially those with underlying liver fibrosis. The aim of our study is to assess the association of an increased FIB-4 score with COVID-19 disease prognosis. Methods: We performed a prospective study on hospitalized patients with known type II diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and confirmed COVID-19, with imaging evidence of liver steatosis within the last year or known diagnosis of MAFLD. All individuals were screened for liver fibrosis with a FIB-4 index. We evaluated the link between FIB-4 and disease prognosis. Results: Of 138 participants, 91.3% had MAFLD and 21.5% patients had a high risk of fibrosis. In the latter group of patients, the number of severe forms of disease, the hospital stay length, the rate of ICU admissions and the number of deaths reported registered a statistically significant increase. The independent predictors for developing severe forms of COVID-19 were obesity (odds ratio (OR), 3.24; 95% confidence interval (CI), p = 0.003), higher values of ferritin (OR-1.9; 95% CI, 1.17-8.29, p = 0.031) and of FIB-4 ≥ 3.25 (OR-4.89; 95% CI, 1.34-12.3, p = 0.02). Conclusions: Patients with high scores of FIB-4 have poor clinical outcomes and liver fibrosis may have a relevant prognostic role. Although the link between liver fibrosis and the prognosis of COVD-19 needs to be evaluated in further studies, screening for liver fibrosis with FIB-4 index, particularly in patients at risk, such as those with T2DM, will make a huge contribution to patient risk stratification.

Empiric use of anticoagulation in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a propensity score-matched study of risks and benefits.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 demonstrate a higher risk of developing thromboembolism. Anticoagulation (AC) has been proposed for high-risk patients, even without confirmed thromboembolism. However, benefits and risks of AC are not well assessed due to insufficient clinical data. We performed a retrospective analysis of outcomes from AC in a large population of COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 1189 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 between March 5 and May 15, 2020, with primary outcomes of mortality, invasive mechanical ventilation, and major bleeding. Patients who received therapeutic AC for known indications were excluded. Propensity score matching of baseline characteristics and admission parameters was performed to minimize bias between cohorts. RESULTS: The analysis cohort included 973 patients. Forty-four patients who received therapeutic AC for confirmed thromboembolic events and atrial fibrillation were excluded. After propensity score matching, 133 patients received empiric therapeutic AC while 215 received low dose prophylactic AC. Overall, there was no difference in the rate of invasive mechanical ventilation (73.7% versus 65.6%, p = 0.133) or mortality (60.2% versus 60.9%, p = 0.885). However, among patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation, empiric therapeutic AC was an independent predictor of lower mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.476, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.345-0.657, p < 0.001) with longer median survival (14 days vs 8 days, p < 0.001), but these associations were not observed in the overall cohort (p = 0.063). Additionally, no significant difference in mortality was found between patients receiving empiric therapeutic AC versus prophylactic AC in various subgroups with different D-dimer level cutoffs. Patients who received therapeutic AC showed a higher incidence of major bleeding (13.8% vs 3.9%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, patients with a HAS-BLED score of ≥2 had a higher risk of mortality (HR 1.482, 95% CI 1.110-1.980, p = 0.008), while those with a score of ≥3 had a higher risk of major bleeding (Odds ratio: 1.883, CI: 1.114-3.729, p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Empiric use of therapeutic AC conferred survival benefit to patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation, but did not show benefit in non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Careful bleeding risk estimation should be pursued before considering escalation of AC intensity.

Deep vein thrombosis in noncritically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia: deep vein thrombosis in nonintensive care unit patients.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolic events have been one of the main causes of mortality among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. The aim of our study was to describe the prevalence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in noncritically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and correlate such observations with the thromboprophylaxis received. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of 67 patients admitted to the hospital for COVID-19 pneumonia. The diagnosis was confirmed using polymerase chain reaction testing of nasopharyngeal specimens. The deep veins were examined using compression duplex ultrasonography with the transducer on B-mode. The patients were separated into two groups for statistical analysis: those receiving low-molecular-weight heparin prophylaxis and those receiving intermediate or complete anticoagulation treatment. Risk analysis and logistic regression were performed. RESULTS: Of the 67 patients, 57 were included in the present study after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria; 49.1% were women, and the patient mean age was 71.3 years. All 57 patients had undergone compression duplex ultrasonography. Of these 57 patients, 6 were diagnosed with DVT, for an in-hospital rate of DVT in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia of 10.5%. All the patients who had presented with DVT had been receiving low-molecular-weight heparin prophylaxis. The patients receiving prophylactic anticoagulation treatment had a greater risk of DVT (16.21%; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.28; P = .056) compared with those receiving intermediate or complete anticoagulation treatment. We also found a protective factor for DVT in the intermediate or complete anticoagulation treatment group (odds ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.46; P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Noncritically ill, hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia have a high risk of DVT despite receipt of correct, standard thromboprophylaxis.

The effect of cardiovascular disease and acute cardiac injury on fatal COVID-19: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: With the continuance of the global COVID-19 pandemic, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cardiac injury have been suggested to be risk factors for severe COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: The aim is to evaluate the mortality risks associated with CVD and cardiac injury among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, especially in subgroups of populations in different countries. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic literature search was performed using 9 databases from November 1, 2019 to November 9, 2020. Meta-analyses were performed for CVD and cardiac injury between non-survivors and survivors of COVID-19. RESULTS: Although the prevalence of CVD in different populations was different, hospitalized COVID-19 patients with CVD were at a higher risk of fatal outcomes (OR = 2.72; 95% CI 2.35-3.16) than those without CVD. Separate meta-analyses of populations in four different countries also reached a similar conclusion that CVD was associated with an increase in mortality. Cardiac injury was common among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Patients with cardiac injury had a significantly higher mortality risk than those without cardiac injury (OR = 13.25; 95% CI: 8.56-20.52). CONCLUSIONS: Patients' CVD history and biomarkers of cardiac injury should be taken into consideration during the hospital stay and incorporated into the routine laboratory panel for COVID-19.

Fungal and bacterial coinfections increase mortality of severely ill COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 predisposes patients to secondary infections; however, a better understanding of the impact of coinfections on the outcome of hospitalized COVID-19 patients is still necessary. AIM: To analyse death risk due to coinfections in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: The odds of death of 212 severely ill COVID-19 patients were evaluated, with detailed focus on the risks for each pathogen, site of infection, comorbidities and length of hospitalization. FINDINGS: The mortality rate was 50.47%. Fungal and/or bacterial isolation occurred in 89 patients, of whom 83.14% died. Coinfected patients stayed hospitalized longer and had an increased odds of dying (odds ratio (OR): 13.45; R2 = 0.31). The risk of death was increased by bacterial (OR: 11.28) and fungal (OR: 5.97) coinfections, with increased levels of creatinine, leucocytes, urea and C-reactive protein. Coinfections increased the risk of death if patients suffered from cardiovascular disease (OR: 11.53), diabetes (OR: 6.00) or obesity (OR: 5.60) in comparison with patients with these comorbidities but without pathogen isolation. The increased risk of death was detected for coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (OR: 25.39), Candida non-albicans (OR: 11.12), S. aureus (OR: 10.72), Acinetobacter spp. (OR: 6.88), Pseudomonas spp. (OR: 4.77), and C. albicans (OR: 3.97). The high-risk sites of infection were blood, tracheal aspirate, and urine. Patients with coinfection undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation were 3.8 times more likely to die than those without positive cultures. CONCLUSION: Severe COVID-19 patients with secondary coinfections required longer hospitalization and had higher risk of death. The early diagnosis of coinfections is essential to identify high-risk patients and to determine the right interventions to reduce mortality.

Oral Candidiasis and COVID-19 in Users of Removable Dentures: Is Special Oral Care Needed?

Elderly patients with systemic disorders and immunocompromised patients seem to have a higher risk of developing morbidity from COVID-19. Candida albicans (C. albicans) is a potentially dangerous pathogen for these patients, especially for denture wearers with prosthetic stomatitis who require mechanical ventilation. C. albicans infection, the main candidiasis infection associated with denture wear, can complicate COVID-19 and increase the associated morbidity and mortality. Therefore, early diagnosis of C. albicans infection in COVID-19 patients is important to establish more effective antifungal treatment methods and prophylaxis strategies. Hospitalized COVID-19 patients should undergo an oral examination to assess their oral health, and those with poor oral health should receive the appropriate care and monitoring.

Neutralizing Antibody Therapeutics for COVID-19.

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 and subsequent COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a significant global public health burden, leading to an urgent need for effective therapeutic strategies. In this article, we review the role of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) in the clinical management of COVID-19 and provide an overview of recent randomized controlled trial data evaluating nAbs in the ambulatory, hospitalized and prophylaxis settings. Two nAb cocktails (casirivimab/imdevimab and bamlanivimab/etesevimab) and one nAb monotherapy (bamlanivimab) have been granted Emergency Use Authorization by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of ambulatory patients who have a high risk of progressing to severe disease, and the European Medicines Agency has similarly recommended both cocktails and bamlanivimab monotherapy for use in COVID-19 patients who do not require supplemental oxygen and who are at high risk of progressing to severe COVID-19. Efficacy of nAbs in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 has been varied, potentially highlighting the challenges of antiviral treatment in patients who have already progressed to severe disease. However, early data suggest a promising prophylactic role for nAbs in providing effective COVID-19 protection. We also review the risk of treatment-emergent antiviral resistant "escape" mutants and strategies to minimize their occurrence, discuss the susceptibility of newly emerging SARS-COV-2 variants to nAbs, as well as explore administration challenges and ways to improve patient access.